The introduction of the New York Times's new star columnist, Vladimir V Putin, this morning should provide Barack Obama with a few useful tips on how to make a persuasive argument to the American people about tackling the Syrian crisis.
By contrast with Mr Obama's unfathomable televised address earlier this week, Mr Putin, whose day job is running Russia, managed to set out a lucid and powerful argument on why the West should proceed with caution on Syria.
Like any good polemicist, Mr Putin indulges in a degree of journalistic licence in his article entitled "A Plea for Caution from Russia." On what basis, for example, can he claim that the chemical weapons attack on the outskirts of Damascus on August 21 was carried out by al-Qaeda-linked Islamist militants rather than the Assad regime?
That said, Mr Putin and his team of Kremlin helpers are to be congratulated on their ability to present a cogent and forceful argument on the perils of unauthorised military intervention in Syria in a way that they will clearly resonate with the American people.
At a time when, thanks to Mr Obama's dithering on the issue, the majority of Americans are confused about how best to respond to the Syrian crisis, Mr Putin has helpfully given them some pointers, the most obvious being that any action undertaken must have UN approval.
Now, thanks to Mr Putin's helpful suggestion earlier this week about disarming Syria's stockpiles of chemical weapons, there is a realistic prospect that such backing may now be forthcoming.
No comments:
Post a Comment